In the case Hilal Udin Tapadar v. State of Assam The daughter of the petitioner took the Assam High School Leaving Certificate Examination (HSLC) 2021, which was initially postponed and subsequently cancelled due to the exceptional circumstances surrounding Covid-19. For the evaluation of results, which was to be based on the performance in the prior exam, a set of instructions were given. However, the candidate was marked as having “failed” when the results were announced. The petitioner then filed a writ case with the High Court, claiming that the evaluation had not been conducted in accordance with the established standards.
Analysis of Court Decision
Sanjay Kumar Medhi, a single judge in the Gauhati High Court, dismissed a writ petition calling for a retest of the Assam High School Board Exam. According to the single-judge bench, not every disagreement may be resolved using the extraordinary authority provided for in Article 226 of the Constitution.
The Court disagreed with the argument and stated that it was now debatable whether to even consider the writ petition in light of the candidate’s dismal performance in the prior examination, which was obvious from the mark sheet. In order to invoke Article 226 of the Constitution, the petitioners must demonstrate that one of their fundamental rights has been violated, according to the Court, and the current challenge is both misguided and an abuse of the legal system. As a result, the plea was denied, and the petitioners had to pay a fee of Rs. 10,000. Petition rejected.